]]>http://emrabc.ca/?feed=rss2&p=157860NRDC and American Tribal Groups’ Update on Cell Tower Lawsuits, The FCC, and Why You Should Care About 5Ghttp://emrabc.ca/?p=15784
http://emrabc.ca/?p=15784#respondThu, 05 Sep 2019 20:09:55 +0000http://emrabc.ca/?p=15784

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is supposed to protect the public by regulating the Telecom Industry. Instead they have a long history of protecting the telecom industry at the public’s expense (see 1, 2). This has become way scarier due to the “Race for 5G” which involves installing hundreds of thousands (maybe millions) of small cells in front of homes and everywhere else.

The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit concluded that a Federal Communications Commission (FCC) deregulation order was arbitrary and capricious because it eliminated historic preservation review under the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), including tribal consultation and environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), for construction of small wireless facilities or small cell radio towers transmitting a cellular signal in an effort to expedite the rollout of the next generation of wireless service known as 5G. The Court of Appeals concluded that the FCC failed to justify its determination that the public interest did not require review of the deployment of hundreds of thousands of small cells. The Court said, “In particular, the Commission failed to justify its confidence that small cell deployments pose little to no cognizable religious, cultural, or environmental risk, particularly given the vast number of proposed deployments and the reality that the Order will principally affect small cells that require new construction.”

While the FCC has limited the review by others, the Commission at the same time has refused to update its own health and environmental guidelines. The Commission’s guidelines date from the 1990’s. In 2012, the General Accountability Office found that the existing guidelines may not reflect current knowledge and recommended that the FCC formally reassess its guidelines. The FCC’s guidelines address only one aspect of potential harm from electromagnetic radiation—heat. The current guidelines do not address other ways in which exposure to increasing electromagnetic radiation from wireless communications can harm human health, as well as the natural systems around us on which all life depends.

by Wireless Estimator – August 28, 2019

Beginning last Friday, contractors started getting calls from T-Mobile’s market managers informing them that most purchase orders they had for new builds and 5G upgrades were going to be put on hold until 2020 unless materials for the project were sitting in a warehouse.

The news came as a shock to many wireless contracting companies that had been counting on fourth quarter builds to maintain their increased staffing required for T-Mobile’s ambitious buildout of the past eight months.

One contractor informed Wireless Estimator that the canceled POs represented approximately $700,000 for his mid-sized company and he had no way of supplementing additional income.

“T-Mobile and all of the other carriers promise a continued pipeline of work if you can provide the crews and then cut you off at the knees with a phone call when it’s in their best interest,” he said.

T-Mobile sells it to Wall Street as it shaves contractors’ balance sheet

A spokesperson for T-Mobile said that it isn’t a nationwide shutdown, simply a Capex adjustment.

In a statement to Wireless Estimator, he said, “We are managing capital expenditures as we do every year, and we continue to invest billions to build out our network aggressively, expanding LTE coverage and performance while simultaneously laying the foundation for broad, nationwide 5G in 2020. That hasn’t and won’t change.”

However, seven contractors interviewed by Wireless Estimator said that in the years that they had worked for them the carrier never stopped their build program due to Capex budget constraints in September.

“There have been times where it was just the opposite where they had to invoice projects scheduled for the following year in December,” a Midwest contractor said.

It is anticipated that T-Mobile will be in line with their network expansion goals and fiscal commitments with their 2019 cash Capex guidance expected to be at the very high end of $5.8 to $6.1 billion, so why did contractors get this sudden September surprise?

According to a T-Mobile construction manager that requested anonymity, T-Mobile had no intention of curtailing growth in Q4 but expected that by June or July the merger with Sprint would have been a done deal, allowing for $1 Billion or more to become available to continue to expand the carrier’s 5G network.

The blame, he believes, should be directly attributed to the 15 state attorneys general plus the District of Columbia who filed a lawsuit in hopes of stopping the T-Mobile $26 billion merger with Sprint because they thought it would not be in the best interest of the American consumer.

Although the U.S. Justice Department greenlit the marriage and the FCC has given its blessing, the AGs are requesting the case to be heard no earlier than December 9.

T-Mobile thought that the merger would have been approved months ago and that’s why they were charging hard to roll out 5G and be able to rely upon additional Capex funding to continue that drive, the T-Mobile manager said.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is the only Republican who joined the lawsuit that is being seen by many contractors to be a political stand against President Trump and the Republican-led FCC, and not what’s best for the country.

“Let’s not let T-Mobile shoulder the blame of having to put in place a nationwide halt to most builds, place it where it belongs on the Democrat AGs,” said one contracting firm’s owner.

A West Coast contractor said the delay is hurting consumers, contractors, and the carriers.

He believes the AGs are casting aside the benefits of the deal to “get cheap ink.”

One contractor informed Wireless Estimator that he was advised that he could take on additional work if he were to delay billing for 120 days, essentially financing T-Mobile’s 5G build since it might be another 60 days before payment was made following his invoicing.

He said he notified them that he would accept those terms, but his pricing would have to be increased.

T-Mobile hasn’t replied to his request.

Smaller subcontractors who barely keep afloat as a result of thin margins and delayed payment terms will be especially hit hard by T-Mobile’s actions.

By Jeremy Hainsworth

A B.C. woman can’t prove her smart electrical meter is causing “many, very serious, symptoms she describes” and would have a problem proving BC Hydro discriminating against her by installing one at her house, B.C.’s Human Rights Tribunal has ruled.

Mary Roadhouse said she has electromagnetic sensitivity triggered by radiation emitted by the smart meter BC Hydro installed at her residence. She said the requirement to have such a meter discriminated against her on the basis of a disability.

BC Hydro argued the meter has its radio turned off and does not transmit, emit, or receive radio waves resulting in a “statistically insignificant level of radiation,” and that there is no evidence is triggers Roadhouse’s symptoms.

The meters came into widespread usage in B.C. in 2013 after a law was passed requiring their use to improve BC Hydro’s ability to accurately measure and manage electricity consumption.

Users were allowed to have legacy meters until they expired or replacement stock ran out.

In August 2018, Roadhouse’s meter expired. She was told she could have a meter with the transmitter off, the Aug. 22 decision from Devyn Cousineau said.

Roadhouse posted a doctor’s note at the meter site saying she is “adversely affected by electromagnetic radiation with symptoms as plugged left ear, stabbing pains right side of head, eye irritation, facial burning, jaw pains, muscle aches, heart palpitations and insomnia. She states that when she goes to the interior off the grid she does not experience these symptoms.”

The new meter was installed without her consent next to a bedroom wall.

She said as soon as it was installed “my legs felt heavy like lead, my heart pounded + my head was swimming. I was affected from the top of my head to the soles of my feet.”

She later wrapped the meter in aluminum foil but says that the symptoms persisted. She says that she has not been able to sleep since the radio‐off meter was installed.

She filed the human rights complaint in November 2018.

BC Hydro argued the tribunal had adjudicated other similar complaints and dismissed them.

“In each case, the tribunal has dismissed the complaints on the basis that there was no evidence capable of proving a connection between the wireless technology and the symptoms which the complainants were suffering,” the decision said.

The utility did not dispute the fact that Roadhouse may have a disability. What is said would cause her claim to fail was an inability to link the disability to the meter.

The decision quoted a previous decision, stating: “there is currently no scientific basis to conclude there is a connection between [electromagnetic] exposure and causality, exacerbation or simply reawakening of dormant [electrohypersensitivity] symptoms.”

“Given the mainstream consensus that radiation emitted by Smart Meters with their radio-frequency function turned on does not adversely impact human health, Ms. Roadhouse will require expert evidence to establish that her Radio‐Off Meter is the source of her suffering,” Cousineau said. “The notes written by Ms. Roadhouse’s doctor are insufficient for this purpose.”

Cousineau also dismissed a so-called expert report on electro hypersensitivity from a man with a “Bachelor of Science, an amateur radio license, and an interest in studying and investigating problems related to radiofrequency radiation.”

“I have explained that a person’s personal enthusiasm for a topic does not qualify them as an expert,” Cousineau said.

After a decade of refusing BC Hydro’s smart meter installations, two Sunnybrae residents have had power cut to their home.

On Monday, Aug. 26 at approximately 10 a.m., BC Hydro workers came to Peter Kastner and Marcie Krozier’s home in Sunnybrae and asked them if they wanted a smart meter installed on their property. When they pair stated they do not want the meter, the crews confirmed with their supervisor and cut the power.

This is the culmination of 10 years worth of protesting the smart meter installation for Kastner and Krozier. Health and safety are the main reasons behind their decision to stay with what BC Hydro calls a ‘legacy meter.’

“My husband and I do a lot of research and we are well aware that it is very unhealthy to basically have dirty electricity or any kind of radiowave regularly around your body,” Krozier said. “We just don’t want this technology anywhere near us. We do not own cell phones – our phones are all hardwired, our computers are all hardwired.”

The decison to stay with the legacy meter has cost the couple a $32.50 monthly legacy fee, and they say they’ve been charged a $65 failed smart meter installation fee three times.

Although they received a disconnection notice from BC Hydro stating they must arrange for a meter exchange before Aug. 14, the pair was not told when the power would be cut. This is one of the issues Krozier has asked her ombudsperson to take up with BC Hydro.

BC Hydro has said the radio off meter does not use any radio frequency to communicate with the greater BC Hydro network – even still the pair do not trust this statement.

“Given our experience with BC Hydro, we understand they don’t keep to their word and we will never have any kind of wireless device on our property,” said Krozier. “Even if it is turned off because we wouldn’t trust them in the future to turn it on.”

Kastner and Krozier live on a property that is home to many chickens and ducks which they raise and use for food – a way of life threatened by the lack of power.

“We have just hatched a bunch of chicks and ducklings so last night we didn’t have any power to keep our little chicks and ducklings warm,” Kastner said. “We have freezers full of meat that are going bad now. We have a bunch of ducklings that depend on heat lamps to survive, it goes on and on.”

One of the sources of income for the pair is Kastner’s woodworking shop. With no power running to his equipment, all woodworking production has stopped. Kastner also built another residence on the property, one which is rented out regularly to Airbnb guests. So far an electric generator has provided enough power to get by on for Kastner, Krozier and their guests.

In a statement from BC Hydro, the company expresses that disconnections are not used lightly.

“Disconnections are always a last resort. We provide a number of letters and phone calls over many months to customers that have meters with expired seals to advise them of the need to exchange the meter and the potential for disconnection prior to attempting the meter exchange,” the statement read. “At this time, we advise customers that if this third-attempt meter exchange is unsuccessful, it could result in their electricity service being disconnected.”

After a court decision, 13 electrically sensitive Linky anti-counters will be able to benefit from the installation of a filter in order to be protected from electromagnetic waves.

This is a small victory for opponents Linky meter : the Tribunal de Grand Instance of Bordeaux has given reason to 13 of the 206 plaintiffs who had initiated a lawsuit against the installation of the electric meter created by Enedis.

A decision due to the electrosensitivity of these applicants, who presented medical certificates recounting their symptoms ( headaches , insomnia…).Recognized pain , even if the National Agency for Food Safety (ANSES) believes that there is no “solid experimental evidence to link electromagnetic waves and symptoms described . “

Result: Enedis has two months to install a filter device protecting these 13 complainants from the electromagnetic fields of the Linky meters.

What about the other complainants?They did not claim an electrosensitivity but feared that the counter Linky is an invasion of their privacy or their free choice.They were dismissed by the summary judge of the Tribunal de Grand Instance de Bordeaux.

If 13 plaintiffs still won, Pierre Hurmic, the plaintiffs’ lawyer, considers this verdict “timid” .“This is a first breach because the decision concerns only a few applicants of the procedure, but it is still a first breach, in what was, the dominant thought so far, Enedis just saying that it there was no danger!, he says.

]]>http://emrabc.ca/?feed=rss2&p=157190Pitt Meadows council concerned about cell towershttp://emrabc.ca/?p=15705
http://emrabc.ca/?p=15705#respondThu, 22 Aug 2019 06:48:57 +0000http://emrabc.ca/?p=15705Asks for more research ahead of 5G technology

NEIL CORBETT Aug. 10, 2019 8:00 a.m.

Pitt Meadows Council is asking senior government for reassurances regarding the safety of cell towers.

Council recently wrote to Pitt Meadows-Maple Ridge MP Dan Ruimy and other politicians and agencies regarding a radio communications tower at 19675 Meadow Gardens Way.

At a July 23 meeting, council passed a resolution “That council forward a letter to the MP, MLA, Health Canada, ISED (Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada) and Rogers expressing significant concerns raised by council and the community regarding the long-term health consequences related to cell towers and wireless technology, and implore the federal government to conduct thorough research into this matter.”

The letter said there is a lack of awareness around potential health risks associated with cell towers. It alleged there is a lack of ongoing research by the federal government regarding these matters, and said it is likely that Safety Code 6 protocols “are significantly out of date.”

“We are also extremely concerned about potentially emerging 5G technology. We urge you to advocate on our behalf for comprehensive research and ongoing public communication and education by Health Canada and other federal agencies into the health effects of wireless technology,” said the letter, which was signed by Mayor Bill Dingwall.

5G is the fifth generation of wireless technology, and has yet to arrive.

He said in an interview that council’s role is limited, but it can make sure that telecommunications companies do consultation regarding tower sites. He said council is reflecting the viewpoints of residents.

“Our citizens are concerned there hasn’t been enough research around wireless technology,” added Dingwall.

Ruimy said he has requested that Health Canada respond to Pitt Meadows council.

For his part, Ruimy puts his faith in the regulations set forth by Health Canada, and its Safety Code 6, which sets safety limits for human exposure to radio frequency electromagnetic energy from wireless devices. The limits are based on reviews of scientific studies and Health Canada’s own research.

Ruimy said he hears from two significant groups on this topic: those who opposed the location of a cell tower, and those who believe exposure to wireless devices in unsafe at even small levels.

“I’m not a scientist, so I have to rely on Health Canada,” he said.

“When BC Hydro put in wireless meters there was a lot of brouhaha, but it has quieted down.”

WASHINGTON — Former Air Force and Navy fighter pilots are calling on the military to begin cancer screenings for aviators as young as 30 because of an increase in deaths from the disease that they suspect may be tied to radiation emitted in the cockpit.

“We are dropping like flies in our 50s from aggressive cancers,” said retired Air Force Col. Eric Nelson, a former F-15E Strike Eagle weapons officer. He cited prostate and esophageal cancers, lymphoma, and glioblastomas that have struck fellow pilots he knew, commanded or flew with.

Nelson’s prostate cancer was first detected at age 48, just three months after he retired from the Air Force. In his career he has more than 2,600 flying hours, including commanding the 455th Air Expeditionary Group in Bagram, Afghanistan, and as commander of six squadrons of F-15E fighter jets at the 4th Operations Group at Seymour Johnson Air Force Base in North Carolina.

Last month McClatchy reported on a new Air Force study that reviewed the risk for prostate cancers among its fighter pilots and new Veterans Health Administration data showing that the rate of reported cases of prostate cancers per year among veterans using the VA health care system across all services has risen almost 16% since fiscal year 2000.

The Air Force study also looked at cockpit exposure, finding that “pilots have greater environmental exposure to ultraviolet and ionizing radiation … (fighter pilots) have unique intra-cockpit exposures to non-ionizing radiation.”

Retired Navy Cmdr. Mike Crosby served as a radar intercept officer in F-14 fighter jets from 1984 to 1997, accumulating over 2,000 flight hours. He started Veterans Prostate Cancer Awareness Inc. in 2016 after his own prostate cancer diagnosis at age 55.

“I think there’s been a lot of avoidance in addressing this issue,” he said. Crosby and other pilots who contacted McClatchy said they suspect the cancers in their community may be linked to prolonged exposure in the cockpit to radiation from the radar systems on their advanced jets, or other sources such as from cockpit oxygen generation systems.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has reported that exposure to some types of radiation can cause cancer, however to date there has been no link established between the specific radiation emitted from radars on these advanced jets and the illnesses pilots are now seeing.

Navy and Air Force pilots told McClatchy about their battles with cancer, their frustrations about what they saw as the limitations of the Air Force study, and about former pilots who have died from cancer.

“When you’re 30 years old you need to start screening for prostate cancer, even if it comes out of your own pocket,” Nelson said. “You need to see a urologist once a year. Not your primary care physician, not your flight doc. Pay the money and stick around for your great-grandkids.”

If the military would begin screening for cancer earlier, “that would save lives,” Nelson said. The military’s health care system, TRICARE, currently covers prostate cancer screenings at age 50 for service members with no family history of the disease, and as young as age 40 if there is a family history of the disease in two or more family members. The pilots who spoke with McClatchy said they did not have a family history of prostate cancer when they were diagnosed.

Retired Navy Cmdr. Thomas Hill was a career F-4 and F-14 pilot and squadron commanding officer with more than 3,600 flight hours and more than 960 aircraft carrier landings. Hill was 52 when he was diagnosed with a brain tumor. In December 2011, at age 60, he learned he also had esophageal cancer.

Hill has spent the last two years tracking premature deaths or cancers among former commanding officers of F-14 squadrons. So far he’s found more than a dozen who have either been diagnosed or have died from the disease.

“God, they’re all my friends,” he said.

What has frustrated some pilots is that the government has looked into the connection between military service and cancer rates for years, but with mixed results.

For example, a 2009 peer-reviewed study published by the American Association for Cancer Research looked at cancer rates among service members from 1990 to 2004 and reported in 2009 that “prostate cancer rates in the military were twice those in the general population, and breast cancer rates were 20% to 40% higher.”

However, a 2011 study published in the peer-reviewed journal “Aviation, Space and Environmental Medicine” found no significant difference in prostate cancer rates between pilots and non-pilots in the military. It’s the same conclusion that the Air Force study found.

“The Air Force did not ask the right question,” Hill said of the study, which like the 2011 aviation journal review compared cancer rates between pilots and non-pilots but largely did not look at what happened to the pilots’ health after their military careers. The Air Force said its study was limited by lack of access to pilots’ health records after they separated from the military.

“If they are really going to protect the people who have gone out and served, they need to look at the guys’ health 20 years after they have finished their military careers,” Hill said. His own informal review of fellow pilots showed a similar pattern: cancers usually surfaced about 15 to 20 years after pilots left the military, which would not have been captured by the Air Force review.

Derek Kaufman, a spokesman for Air Force Materiel Command, said further studies are under consideration. “We have presented potential options for a follow-up study to the Air Force Medical Readiness Agency,” Kaufman said.

None of the pilots who spoke with McClatchy said a greater risk of cancer would have kept them from flying. They said the military should acknowledge the risk and put additional protections in place for the next generation of military aviators.

Hill said he’s also worried about the enlisted crew who manned the flight decks of the aircraft carriers.

“The kids that worked the flight line and the flight deck were exposed eight hours a day to that stuff,” Hill said.

For future protections for pilots, Crosby said it would be unlikely that the services would retrofit aircraft to add protections against the sources of cockpit radiation, which may be difficult to isolate and would likely add unwanted weight or otherwise affect the performance of the aircraft.

“If we can’t change it, we need to be responsible and send an alert that people being exposed need to be screened earlier,” Crosby said. “If it’s caught early enough, there’s a lot of procedures that can not just treat (prostate cancer) but cure it.”

This is an example of a “node” antenna located at Newell Road and Hopkins Avenue in Palo Alto. At left is the equipment box. At right is the top of the antenna. Photos were provided to the city by Verizon.

Los Altos became the first city in the mid-Peninsula to largely ban small cell antennas, or “nodes” in residential neighborhoods, but not all residents were behind the idea.

The council on Monday (Aug. 5) voted 4-0, with councilwoman Jeannie Bruins absent, to approve stringent regulations on the nodes after council members and residents expressed dismay over the aesthetics of the devices, along with the noises they make.

Cellphone companies say that the nodes, which are mounted to the top of utility poles, will improve service.

Resident Jim Fenton said that the city’s residents are not in unanimity on this topic. Fenton said he’s worried the ordinance will fly in the face of the FCC regulations and the city may get sued.

“I don’t want my tax dollars going to try to defend the city against something it will probably lose,” said Fenton.

Fenton and Verizon attorney Paul Albritton were the only two people to speak against the ordinance at Monday’s hearing. About 20 people went to the microphone, and the others were in favor of the ordinance.

Jeanine Valadez told the council that four of the proposed nodes would be near her Los Altos home.

“I don’t know why such proximity would be necessary,” Valadez said, adding that she is not happy with the humming noise the nodes make.

The ordinance sets forth the city’s preference order as to where these nodes can go. The lists puts neighborhoods at the bottom. The council also added in mixed-use buildings to the ordinance, they are not at the very bottom, but will require for cell phone companies to put the nodes a certain amount of feet away, so people in apartments or condos are not bothered.

This means the nodes aren’t completely banned in residential neighborhoods.

Assistant City Attorney Gail Karish warned the council that an outright ban could lead to lawsuits from cellphone companies.

If telecom companies want to put a cell node in a neighborhood, they must file an application with the city that explains why the city must approve the project and how it will benefit the area’s cell coverage.

Applicants will also have to include the following:

• A description identifying where service will be improved if the node is installed in the neighborhood,

• A master plan of all proposed nodes in relation to the existing and potential locations in the city for nodes,

• An analysis of at least five other places in the area where the company could put the node instead,

• A sample of the proposed notice, and the envelope it will be mailed in, that will be sent to all residents within 1,000 feet of the new node.

The ordinance also requires that the nodes cannot be within 500 feet of a school, the nodes must be separated by 1,500 feet and be placed mid-block so they are not as obvious when placed on street corners.

During the summer of 2018, David Morrison and Deb Mayer made the rounds visiting legislator after legislator in Salem to find sponsors for bills that would protect people, especially children, from the harmful health effects of WiFi radiation. Ultimately, they found a champion in Senator Laurie Monnes Anderson who suggested they write an evidence-based draft detailing the problem and possible solutions. With a little help from their friends and colleagues from across the state, nation, and world, Morrison and Mayer drafted three bills: SB 281 to label wireless digital products, SB 282 to limit students’ use of wireless devices at school, and SB 283 to protect children from the harmful health effects of Wifi radiation. While the first two bills languished in committee, SB 283 garnered bipartisan support and passed unanimously. The bill becomes law August 9th. It is the first law of its kind in the United States.

SB 283 requires the Oregon Health Authority to review effects of exposure to microwave radiation in schools, and to develop recommendations for practices and alternatives that eliminate students’ exposures, no later than September 15, 2020. David Morrison, who has accumulated evidence on health risks of electromagnetic fields over the past 10 years is finally seeing his efforts pay off. During a March hearing, he displayed four boxes of documents representing the thousands of independent studies concluding WiFi radiation poses a threat to living things. Even though legislators continue to poke fun at the bill and its supporters, the bills creators couldn’t be more serious in their determination to educate doubters. Protecting the health of our children is no joke.

SB 283 directs the Department of Education to disclose potential health risks of wireless radiation, and to adopt guidelines on how to use wireless devices more safely.

Senator Laurie Monnes Anderson, a former public health nurse, introduced SB 283 during precession and has been an unrelenting supporter persevering until its passage. During a hearing in March, the Senator reminded her colleagues that they have a fiduciary responsibility to protect Oregon’s children at school.

The following is a timeline of the proceedings that led to SB 283 becoming law.

Testimony under the heading of Meeting Materials may be viewed on the OLIS website.

80th OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY – 2019 Regular Session (March 27th)

Senator Wagner, Education Committee Chair, opens hearings on SB 283.

Prof. Paul Héroux, Professor of Toxicology and Health Effects of Electromagnetism at the McGill University flew to Portland from Montreal to testify on behalf of SB 283, only to return to Monreal the following day. Prof. Héroux developed a Unified Theory of Weak Magnetic Field Action that proposes A radical new outlook.

Professor Héroux’s testimony begins at 1:19:26 mm. He is interrupted briefly by Senator Laurie Monnes Anderson who must rush to a committee meeting. His testimony continues at 1:28:08 mm.

Senator Laurie Monnes-Anderson introduced the bill as a legislator and retired public health nurse. Monnes-Anderson is also a former school board member and the mother of two children who attended Oregon public schools. She understands the strengths and weaknesses of our public education system and has become well versed in the potential risks of long term exposure to microwave radiation in the classroom environment and made a special appearance at the hearing to speak in support of the bill.

David Morrison has accumulated evidence on health risks of electromagnetic fields, and his efforts are now allowing SB 283 to be voted on. At extreme left, he points to 4 boxes of documents accumulated in the last 10 years.

David Morrison begins at timestamp 1:30:18 mm

Cindy Franklin begins at timestamp 1:34:20 mm

Karen Josephson begins at timestamp 1:36:20 mm

Dr. Paul Dart, an Environmental Physician of Eugene,Oregon, makes invisible electromagnetic radiation visible using an instrument as he testifies before the Senate. The term Electromagnetic Medicine has, over the years, meant researchers in laboratories using electromagnetic radiation to treat diseases. Dr. Dart gives it a new, clinical meaning, in the protection of Lucia, 14 years old, who testified below.

Dr. Dart begins at timestamp 1:39:00 mm

Lucia, a minor, attended school while positioned just below a WiFi router.

At 9 years old, she became ill with nausea and rashes, and for over a year saw 7 doctors before her family realized that she was made sick by the WiFi radiation. Her mother switched her to the only school available that did not have WiFi, and she recovered. Graduating from her current school, she is now looking to continue her studies in an environment that will not make her sick.

During her SB 282 testimony, Senator Laurie Monnes Anderson informed the Education Committee that the Oregon Health Authority would do a study so the bill must move forward to the Ways and Means committee.

So, what happened to SB 281 and SB 282 — the labeling and screen time bills? They languished in committee and died there, but not before some pretty spectacular testimony of support. You may notice a common theme throughout the testimony on all of these bills. Not one person raised a voice against them. That being said, members from the tech industry were not absent. They could be seen occupying seats in the back row diligently taking notes during the sessions.

Below is more testimony for SB 282 It begins at the !:30:20 mm timestamp. Angelica Rae Kugler and Deb Mayer testify.

Read more about the the device that Mayer simulates in this article, “Headband that detects brain activity gets tryout in schools; goal is to improve student engagement”. Mayer and her colleagues are perpetually perturbed that The Oregonian publishes stories like this one (which is nothing more than an advertisement for BrainCo.) and refuses to print stories about proposed legislation to protect kids from such devices.

The fate of SB 281

SB 281 was heard in the Environment and Natural Resources Committee.

Senator Mike Debrow opens the hearing on SB 281, a bill to require manufacturers of wireless products to provide warning labels and safety information to consumers.

Testimony begins at !:30:00 mm

Senator Laurie Monnes Anderson 1:30:20 mm

Deb Mayer at !:32:20 mm

David Morrison at 1:38:23 mm

The short life cycle of SB 281 may be viewed at the Oregon Legislative Information System website.